Is the Tide Turning on Religious Belief?

[Dr. Who]

Yes, you could easily assert that. What then? Nothing. You haven't answrered the question. Does it seem reasonable to suggest that absent a god, we simply abandon ourselves to meaningless chaos? NO. Are you asking for a reason? No one said we should.

So, human beings give all things meaning. That's the ciruclar argument he's referring to.

No one mentioned perfect truth, perfect morality etc. whatever those might be.

You are demanding an answer to a question predicated on the existence of God. No answer, not so predicated, will satisfy you.

Yes, human beings have brains that reason and find meaning whether they are creating abstractions like gods or concepts of perfection or whether it is a determination on how best to treat one another.

No one had to mention perfect truth or perfect morality - this isn't our first rodeo on this topic.

[Chris]

I notice he doesn't use the word nihilistic. His word, as evidenced in the title of the book, is humanism.

It was a separate point about earlier atheism incapable of replacing what it destroys. That being filled by the humanism of the likes of Compte, Frauerback, Marx, Nietzsche.

So sure, you may find an answer in humanism and its mystical immanentism, that is, as I understand it, finding the divine in the material world. But isn't that regressive, and not progressive? A return to ancient religion?

D posted this elsewhere:

It's the other way around. It was only with the advent of the state and monarchy that deities were regularly depicted in human form. For most of human history, the gods were thought of as immanent in their associated phenomena. This passage may help explain what is meant by that.

Whereas the power speaking to Moses in the desert diassociates itself from the bush, and identifies itself as the god of Moses' fathers, numinous power speaking to the Mespotamian Enkidu in the Gilgamesh Epic does not choose to diassociate itself from its locus and so needs no introduction. The Gilgamesh Epic simply states: "The sun god heard the word of his mouth; from afar, from the midst of heaven he kept calling out to him". The power here is seen as immanent in the visibile sun, is what animates it and motivates it, is the god who informs it.

The passage cited comes from Thorkild Jacobsen's The Treasures of Darkness: A History of Mesopotamian Religion.

[Dr. Who]

It's not innate either.

It is, as it's derived from an in-born ability to think, reason, dream and exert individual will.

[Mister D]

It is, as it's derived from an in-born ability to think, reason, dream and exert individual will.

That's the circular argument Ethereal referred to.

[Mister D]

You are demanding an answer to a question predicated on the existence of God. No answer, not so predicated, will satisfy you.

Yes, human beings have brains that reason and find meaning whether they are creating abstractions like gods or concepts of perfection or whether it is a determination on how best to treat one another.

No one had to mention perfect truth or perfect morality - this isn't our first rodeo on this topic.

No, Ethereal asked a question.

And what meaning does "reason" possess absent a metaphysical basis? Because all these words - "evil", "truth", "justice", "reason" - are ultimately abstractions. They don't exist in a material sense. You can't measure or observe them. So where do they come from? And what gives them meaning? The only response atheists ever come up with are tautologies and circular arguments.

There is nothing about God in there.

You provided the circular answer he no doubt expected.

[Dr. Who]

Here we go again...nouns, adjectives and verbs oh my!

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/...ish/nihilistic

connected with a belief that all political and religious organizations are bad, or a system of thought that says thatthere are no principles or beliefs that have any meaning or can be true:

That you don't believe this is the entire point. If atheism is true, so is nihilism. That is precisely why you cannot account for evil because there are no principles or beliefs that have any meaning or can be true.

Again, your hyperbolically large bolded text does not describe what atheism means to most atheists. It may be your assertion and your belief that the absence of a divine creator voids all meaning, principles or truth but on behalf of the majority of atheists, it is categorically denied. Repeating the same allegation does not make it true, just your opinion.

[Dr. Who]

Whether you call it "god" or "reason" or "truth", it's all based on something transcendental.

OK, that sounds interesting. Can you elaborate?

[Chris]

Again, your hyperbolically large bolded text does not describe what atheism means to most atheists. It may be your assertion and your belief that the absence of a divine creator voids all meaning, principles or truth but on behalf of the majority of atheists, it is categorically denied. Repeating the same allegation does not make it true, just your opinion.

But it is, it is true as atheists. You can be more, adopt other, let's call them, identities, as in I'm an atheist, something of a traditionalist, a conservative, an American, a Westerner, etc. As discussed just above you might embrace some form of humanism. Whatever, but it won't be found in atheism no matter how you define it.

[Mister D]

Again, your hyperbolically large bolded text does not describe what atheism means to most atheists. It may be your assertion and your belief that the absence of a divine creator voids all meaning, principles or truth but on behalf of the majority of atheists, it is categorically denied. Repeating the same allegation does not make it true, just your opinion.

Round and round we go.

You make your own truth, priciples and meaning out of an otherwise meaningless existence. Right? We are the source of truth. We are the source of meaning. Correct?

[Mister D]

OK, that sounds interesting. Can you elaborate?

It means it comes from beyond you. You are not the source.